Tarun Kumar Sahay, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2025/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87038 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 12-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J P CHANDRAKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ARUN GARG
• Keywords: Gift; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN (DELHI BENCH H NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2025/DE L/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) TARUN KUMAR SAHAY, VS. ITO B- 19/1, SHYAM VIHAR, PHASE-II WARD 24(2), NEAR MATA MANDIR, GOLA DIARY ROAD, NAZAFGARH NEW DELHI NEW DELHI AKWPS5358M (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ARUN GARG, C A. REVENUE BY : SH. J.P.CHANDRAKAR, SR. DR. DATE OF HEARING : 12.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.03.2015 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) XXIII, NEW D ELHI DATED 23.01.2013 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-0 7. IN I.T.A. N O. 2025/DEL/2013 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEALS :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW, THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A) IS BAD-IN-LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER EX-PARTE. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE RODER PASSED IS WITHOUT PROVIDING PROP ER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITED / GIFT RECEIVED IS ERRON EOUS AND THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DELTED THE SAME. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN RECEIVED FROM ABDUL AHMED SIDDIQUI IS ERRONEOUS AND CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DELETED THE SAME. 6. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE ADDITION OF RS. 144370/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES IS ERRONEOUS AN D CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE DELETED THE SAME. 3 . BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSES SMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINA FTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS FRAMED. THEREBY THE ASSESSING O FFICER MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DE POSIT, ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN RECEIVED FROM ABDUL AH MED SIDDIQUI IN I.T.A. N O. 2025/DEL/2013 3 AMOUNTING OF RS. 4,00,000/- ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AMOUNTING OF RS. 1,44,370/-. HENCE, THE AS SESSING OFFICER ASSESSED INCOME AT RS. 19,37,470/- AGAINST THE RETU RN INCOME OF RS. 4,93,100/-. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN AP PEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY APPLYING THE DE CISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTI PLA N INDIA PVT. LTD. 38 ITD 320 DELHI FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSE E FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING T HE ASSESSEE FURTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE IN TEREST OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE THE ASSESSEE MAY BE AFFORDED ANOTHE R OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. SR. DR ON BEHALF OF T HE REVENUE OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION AND SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A ) AFFORDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO TAKE BENEFIT OF ITS OWN WRONG. IN I.T.A. N O. 2025/DEL/2013 4 5. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DI SMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 3. THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT WAS FIXED FOR HEA RING ON 22.5.2012 VIDE NOTICE U/S 250 DATED 09.05.2012. THE ENVELOPE CONTAINING THE NOTICE WAS RETURNED TO THIS OFFICE ON 15.05.2012 WITH THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES AS NO SUCH PERSON. ON 23.08.2012, THE APPELLANT FILED A LETTER INTIMATING THE CHANGE OF A DDRESS. ON 13.12.2012, A NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED FIXING THE CAS E FOR HEARING ON 19.12.2012 AT THE NEW ADDRESS, IN RESPON SE TO WHICH, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED. THE CA SE WAS ADJOURNED TO 04.01.2013, ON WHICH DATE NO ONE ATTEN DED. BY NOTICE DATED 14.01.2013, THE CASE WAS RE-FIXED F OR 22.01.2013. ON THIS DATE ALSO NO ONE HAS ATTENDED T HE PROCEEDINGS NOR HAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT BEEN FILED. NO WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN SUP PORT OF THE APPEAL. 6. AFTER CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE G IVEN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND TO SUBSE RVE THE INTEREST OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WE HEREBY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR DECISION AFRESH. THE ASS ESSEE WOULD SUO MOTO FURNISH A COPY OF THIS ORDER TO THE LD. CIT(A ) FOR FIXING OF THE APPEAL FOR HEARING. LD. CIT(A) WOULD AFFORDE D SUFFICIENT IN I.T.A. N O. 2025/DEL/2013 5 OPPORTUNITY TO THE CONCERNED PARTIES BEFORE DISPOSA L OF THE APPEAL. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT SEEK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT AND CO-OPERATE IN APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY 13 TH MARCH, 2015 . SD/- SD/- (G.D.AGRAWAL) (KUL BHARAT ) (VICE PRESIDENT) J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED 13 TH MARCH, 2015 B.RUKHAIYAR COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. CIT (ITAT), NEW DELHI. BY O RDER AR,I TAT NEW DELHI IN I.T.A. N O. 2025/DEL/2013 6 SL. NO. DESCRIPTION DATE 1. DATE OF DICTATION BY THE AUTHOR 12.03.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 12.03.2015 3. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER 5. DATE OF APPROVED ORDER COMES TO THE SR. PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER 7. DATE OF FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER